Title
People vs. Villena
Case
G.R. No. 236305
Decision Date
Mar 17, 2021
Accused-appellant convicted of statutory rape of intellectually disabled minor; Supreme Court affirmed conviction, modified charge, and upheld witness credibility despite mental disability.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 236305)

Procedural History

Villena was charged in the Regional Trial Court Branch 32 of Agoo, La Union on March 18, 2011. During the arraignment on April 4, 2011, he pleaded not guilty. Following the trial, on January 29, 2013, the Regional Trial Court found him guilty of qualified rape and imposed a sentence of reclusion perpetua. Villena’s conviction was subsequently modified by the Court of Appeals to simple rape due to the absence of evidence that he was aware of AAA’s mental condition at the time of the crime. Villena then appealed this decision.

Evidence and Testimonies

In the trial, the prosecution presented multiple witnesses, including AAA, her family members, and medical professionals. AAA recounted that Villena, while intoxicated, entered her room, strangled her, removed her clothing, and subsequently raped her, resulting in visible injuries on her neck. Dr. Tangalin, the psychiatrist, indicated that AAA had mild mental retardation, with her mental age ranging from 9 to 12 years, supporting the prosecution's argument regarding her incapacity to consent.

Defense's Arguments

Villena presented his defense, denying the allegations and claiming he was drinking with others during the time of the incident. He argued against the validity of AAA’s testimony and asserted that her alleged mental condition was not established beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, he claimed that his defense of denial should be given weight due to the lack of corroboration.

Court of Appeals Findings

The Court of Appeals dismissed Villena’s appeal, underscoring that the trial court had properly assessed AAA’s mental condition and testimony. The Appeals Court upheld the trial court's conviction for simple rape, clarifying that without establishing Villena's knowledge of AAA's mental disability, the crime could not be classified as qualified rape.

Legal Principles and Conclusions

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that statutory rape is committed under Article 266-A when the victim is below twelve years of age or is deemed demented, which includes those diagnosed with intellectual disabilities. The Supreme Court determined that Villena's guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, highlighting that the prosecution had sufficiently established both the act of sexual congress and

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.